1st Circuit denies appeal of Whitey Bulger’s girlfriend

The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has denied Catherine Greig’s bid to overturn her eight-year prison term for harboring a fugitive.

Greig, the longtime girlfriend of James “Whitey” Bulger, pleaded guilty last summer in front of U.S. District Court Judge Douglas P. Woodlock. A few weeks later, she filed an appeal arguing that Woodlock misinterpreted the harboring statute under the sentencing guidelines.

But the panel — made up of retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice David H. Souter and 1st Circuit Judges Norman H. Stahl and O. Rogeriee Thompson – disagreed in a ruling issued today.

“On June 22, 2011, Greig’s many years of harboring Bulger came to an end,” Thompson wrote for the panel. “Our consideration of her claimed errors has similarly reached its conclusion. … We affirm the judgment of the district court.”

Dana A. Curhan, who represents Greig, told Lawyers Weekly he was not “terribly surprised” by the ruling, but noted that the court’s reasoning differed significantly from Woodlock’s at sentencing. The Boston lawyer said he had not yet talked with Greig about her remaining legal options but conceded that the outlook is bleak.

“The next possibility would be to file a cert petition [before the U.S. Supreme Court],” Curhan said. “There is not a lot else that she can do.”

In the decision, Thompson noted that Greig traveled with Bulger across the country for an extended period of time and played an active role in his flight.

“She then settled with him in California, where the two remained for a whopping fifteen years or so,” she said. “During this time, Greig did not just provide Bulger with shelter, rather she saw to his day-to-day needs, ran errands, maintained the house, paid the bills, and helped him procure medical treatment and needed medications.”

Greig’s handling of those tasks undoubtedly helped Bulger keep his public outings to a minimum, thereby reducing his risk of detection, the judge said.

“When Bulger did have to go out and about, Greig kept the ruse going, assuming a false identity herself and helping Bulger carry on with his,” Thompson said. “In light of this conduct, which extended well over a decade, the district court did not err in finding that Greig’s conduct was not limited to harboring Bulger and refusing to cap her offense level accordingly.”

Thompson noted that there were 30 weapons, mostly firearms, found in the two-bedroom apartment Greig and Bulger shared.

Many of the weapons were hidden in the walls, as was the pair’s money that Greig used for day-to-day needs, Thompson said. Other weapons were out in the open or under the bed in Bulger’s bedroom.

“All of the above evidence was more than sufficient to support the district court’s finding that Greig knew about the weapons in the home,” the judge wrote. “There was no clear error. By this same token, the court did not err in finding that Greig would have known that the weapons were for avoiding apprehension.”

The judge also said that Greig was fully aware that Bulger was wanted for very serious and violent crimes, some involving murder with guns.

“The pair went to extraordinary lengths to avoid detection and it was not obviously wrong for the judge to find it foreseeable to Greig that Bulger would possess a weapon in furtherance of the underlying conspiracy,” she said.

Thompson went on to say that the 1st Circuit found no fault with the highly critical and controversial statements made by victims’ family members at sentencing. Although Greig contended that the judge improperly allowed them to be made, Thompson said they were relevant to Greig’s background, character and conduct.

“These statements were particularly relevant given that Greig submitted a letter penned by her sister, which spoke of Greig’s upbringing and background and her caring and kind nature,” Thompson said. “And when two of the family members made particularly harsh statements, the district judge disclaimed reliance on those comments, making clear that he did not countenance such language and that it had no part in the criminal justice system.”

The 26-page decision, United States v. Greig, is Lawyers Weekly No. 01-125-13.